AN ADDRESS 


V- 


ON 

THE BALLOT BOX 


DELIVERED BY 



GEORGE S. GRAHAM, 



BEFORE 



THE PENNSYLVANIA CLUB 


MARCH lo, 1885. 


PHILADELPHIA; 

Printed for the Pennsylvania Club, 
1220 walnut street. 

1 885 . 









f 




PRESS Of WM. F. FELL & CO., 
1220-22 SANSOM ST., PHILADELPHIA. 





> 











{ 6 ^\ 

^^1 


THE BALLOT-BOX. 


The ballot-box is merely a receptacle for bal¬ 
lots. Legally, there is no requirement as to its 
size or shape. It may be either round or square ; 
and if it were hexagonal or octagonal, the election 
on that account would not be invalid. In size it 
need only be of sufficient capacity to answer the 
purpose of its use. There is no restriction or 
limitation as to the material of which it is to be 
made. Until the silver of Nevada, the gold of 
California, the iron of Pennsylvania, and the 
forests of the Nation are exhausted, we cannot 
be deprived of this important article in our 
elections; even then, there is a multitude of other 
materials of which it can be made. The supply 
of materials is ample for ourselves and our pos¬ 
terity. 

The term box, however, is generally used to 
denote a wooden vessel. In our State the ballot- 
box is manufactured from wood. 

There are instances in history, of boxes used 
for this purpose, which were not made of wood. 

In Athens, that wonderful democracy, existing 
in the centuries before the Christian era, the free¬ 
men in exercising their right to vote, placed their 
ballots in receptacles of brass. 

When the citizens of republican Rome exercised 
their royal prerogative, a wicker box received the 
mandate of their will. To this day, in Greece, 
3 


0 



4 


metal^ boxes are used. Each box is divided into 
two compartments, and is provided with a funnel- 
shaped opening, with a division in it, providing at 
the inner end a separate entrance to each com¬ 
partment. One of these compartments is called 
the “Yes” box and the other the “No” box. 
The voter thrusts his arm into the funnel-shaped 
opening, and then, secure from observation, he 
drops his vote, a metal ball, into whichever com¬ 
partment he desires. 

In England, Germany, France, Hungary, Italy, 
and the British provinces, wooden boxes are used. 

A box used in every-day life, is nothing but 
a common box, valued only because of its utility ; 
but a box set apart to receive the expression of 
the will of the sovereign people, ceases to be 
ordinary, and at least, while used for that noble 
purpose, ought almost to be considered as a sacred 
thing. When thus employed it bears an exalted 
character; and becomes an object of the law’s 
jealous guardianship. 

The box is ennobled by its contents—the bal¬ 
lots. 

The word ballot owes its origin to the French 
word ballotte, and the Spanish balota, and signifies 
in its restricted and primary meaning a little ball 
used in secret voting. 

In Athens, the ballots used were made either of 
stone (psephi) or of metal (sponduli), and were 
pierced or unpierced, or else black or white, to 
indicate condemnation or approval. 

In Syracuse, words written on olive leaves, were 
voted; this practice was named petalism. 


5 


In Rome, small wooden tablets were used as 
ballots, and the ballot was resorted to in determin¬ 
ing elections, deciding causes, and in enacting or 
repealing laws. 

The ballot of the present day, however, is either 
a printed or written ticket, made of paper. The 
wooden tablet has disappeared, and the ball, or 
real ballot, is now only used in social and secret 
organizations, and in some corporations in electing 
officers and admitting members, except in Greece, 
which, perhaps, is the only country still using 
metal ballots. 

A peculiar substitute for the ballot is recorded 
as having been in use in Hungary. Each candi¬ 
date had a large box, painted with some distin¬ 
guishing color, with his name superscribed thereon. 
On entering the room alone, the voter received a 
rod, from four to six feet in length, which he 
placed in the box through a slit in the lid. 

This was a primitive method, intended to secure 
an honest vote, and for that purpose is much to 
be preferred to tissue-ballots. It would be very 
difficult to carry many non-official rods about 
one’s person, or to conceal many ballots, from 
four to six feet in length. The Hungarian sys¬ 
tem is cordially recommended to any unrecon¬ 
structed portion of the South, as an antidote for 
unlawful and cumulative voting. 

The ballot does not seem to have been very 
extensively used until recently. Within the last 
quarter of a century alone, the use of it has be¬ 
come general among the leading nations of the 
earth. It was not until 1872 that the ballot was 


6 


introduced in all parliamentary and municipal 
elections in England (except for representatives 
of the Universities). In that year the Ballot Act 
was passed (35 and 36 Vic. c. 3). As late as the 
beginning of the second Empire in France, it was 
decreed by the Organic decree of February 2, 
1852, that the members of the French Legislature 
should be elected by ballot. It was not until the 
establishment of Italian Unity, that the ballot, 
theretofore existing in Piedmont, was adopted 
in Italy. Germany began to use the ballot in 
1867, and the new German Constitution of 1871 
provided that all elections to the Reichstag should 
be by ballot. Under a special law, certain mu¬ 
nicipal officers of Prussia were elected by ballot 
as far back as 1808. In Hungary it was adopted 
in 1848, but abolished, so far as Parliamentary 
elections are concerned, since 1874. In some 
of the British provinces this method of voting 
was adopted before it found favor in the eyes of 
the mother country. 

Naturally we turn to the great Republic of the 
West/the true mother of popular elections and 
the sovereignty of the people, expecting to learn 
of its early adoption and use. 

Every one that glories in the name of Ameri¬ 
can, whether receiving that name by adoption, 
or holding it as a birthright, ought to honor 
and revere Plymouth Rock, and hold in sacred 
memory the name of Pilgrim. No one can con¬ 
template the grand birthright and sacred privi¬ 
leges of American citizenship, without recognizing 
that we -owe a debt of gratitude to the Pilgrim 


7 


Fathers for many rock truths, upon which so 
much has been built. In these days of laxity, 
when liberty is in danger of being transformed 
into license, there is a growing tendency to sneer 
at many of the teachings and practices of the 
Puritans ; but every candid man, and every 
patriot, will delight to trace in our institutions 
of to-day elements of morality and liberty, of law 
and order, all, the outgrowth of their stern moral¬ 
ity, rigid adherence to principle, and love of liberty 
and equality. Let us delight to trace in their 
pure teachings the germs of inestimable bless¬ 
ings possessed by us, and honor and respect their 
memory and virtues. 

These men thought for themselves. For the 
sake of principle they left their homes in England, 
and sought shelter in Holland. They loved the 
truth, as they apprehended it, and made great 
sacrifices for its sake. They were not afraid to 
work ; industry was a part of their religion. They 
were honest, and to be so was ingrained. They 
were not meddlesome, for they trained themselves, 
as a duty, to mind their own affairs. The licen¬ 
tious revelries of the age were held in abhorrence. 
Possessed of deep religious feeling and clear con¬ 
victions, they wrought when work was proper, and 
rested on the great appointed day of rest. Sunday 
to them was not a day of wildest dissipation, but 
a day of calm and peaceful worship. 

In the organization of their little church, they 
evolved a mighty truth. They met as equals, and 
elected their officers, not to be their masters, but 
their servants ; the right to rule themselves be- 


came their children’s birthright. This principle 
was then but a tiny, purling spring of truth; but 
now, as we trace its flow through centuries, we 
behold it sweeping on, a mighty, majestic river, 
lifting on its bosom free States, whelming in its 
waters tyranny and oppression, and undermining 
the thrones of Kings and Emperors. 

Think of it! A band of carpenters, black¬ 
smiths and artisans, in the heart of old Holland, 
evolving the mighty truth-that the people alone shall 
rule, and the correlated principle that those elected 
to offlce are not the masters, but the servants of 
the people. Grand principles, indeed! Vital 
principles in the government of our own Republic, 
and exerting a beneficeiit influence on the civilized 
world. 

After they had left Leyden and reached South¬ 
ampton, and were about to sail forth on their 
perilous voyage in search of an asylum, they 
elected their first governor, and that election was 
by ballot. 

Charles C. Coffin, in Old Times in the Colo¬ 
nies,” thus describes the election : “ They were 
men who loved order. They knew it was neces¬ 
sary to have some one in authority on shipboard. 
They cast their votes for governor, and elected 
John Carver. Let us not forget that they elected 
him. He was not appointed by the King, but 
chosen.” 

It was, indeed, the beginning of a new order of 
things. 

On the 16th day of September, A. D., 1620, the 
Mayflower, with her precious cargo, set sail. 


9 


“ No home for them ! Too well they knew 
The mitred king behind the throne. 

The sails were set, the pennon flew, 

And westward ho ! for worlds unknown.” 

“ Before landing in die New World, diey met 
in the cabin of the Mayflower, signed their names 
to a paper, organizing as a body politic, agreeing 
to obey the laws they might make, and the Gov¬ 
ernor they might elect. The world never before 
had seen such a paper. It was a constitution 
formed by the people—the real beginning of 
popular government.” 

It is safe to assert that the Pilgrims, at this early 
date, used the ballot, and also that it was largely 
used in the American colonies, and, doubtless, by 
most of them, at the date of the Revolution. 

In the Constitution of Pennsylvania, adopted in 
1790, the evidence of its early use in this State is 
found in this provision: “ Election shall be by 
ballot.” The revised statutes of the United States 
inform us that “all votes for representatives in 
Congress must be by a written or printed ballot.” 
This requires the use of the ballot system of 
voting in every one of these United States. 

The Xllth amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States provides for its use in the electoral 
college : “ The electors shall vote for President 
and Vice President by ballot.” And again, “If no 
person shall have a majority of the electoral votes 
for President and Vice President, the House of 
Representatives shall immediately choose the 
President by ballot.” 

The ballot is the synonym for secrecy, and the 


lO 


direction to use the ballot-box is a pledge of free¬ 
dom from scrutiny. It may not be without evil, in 
political elections, and its use has been frequently 
questioned ; *but the whole trend of thought and 
practice to-day is overwhelmingly in its favor. 

Mr. Gibbon, in his familiar work, ‘‘The Decline 
and Fall of the Roman Empire,” avers that the 
famous republic began its decline from the intro¬ 
duction of secret voting, which, he says, destroyed 
public confidence—in effect, broke up the ancient 
relations of patron and client, and caused a general 
demoralization of the people. 

In the elections of Greece, this system was both 
criticised and praised. 

The brilliant Sydney Smith was found among its 
opponents in England ; and those who advocated 
it suffered from his fine sarcasm and ridicule. In 
spite of ridicule and argument, however, it has 
become the established practice of the Empire. 

Curiously enough, the very argument assigned 
in its favor, in one country of Europe, was used, 
in another country, against it. 

Cavour, that bright star that shone out of the 
Italian night, and whose skillful diplomacy achieved 
wonders for Italy, regarded the ballot with appro¬ 
val. In my judgment, said he, “ the ballot has 
quite nullified the clerical power, at least in 
Piedmont.” 

On the contrary, in Hungary, when, in 1874, 
the use of secret voting was abolished in Parlia¬ 
mentary elections ; the reason given was, “ That 
the ballot was worked by the Catholic clergy, 
through the confessional.” 


The grand object of the ballot is to secure an 
honest and free expression of judgment, to pre¬ 
vent intimidation and undue influence, and protect 
the voter from persecution. An employe must be 
free from fear of his employer; a storekeeper 
from the ill will of his patrons ; a tenant from the 
intimidation of his landlord ; and every citizen from 
his neighbors. To some extent, it also prevents 
bribery. 

The personal responsibility of the voter is 
lessened by the concealment of his vote, but this 
is overmatched by the freedom secured to con¬ 
scientious voters, to vote according to conscience. 
Secrecy is a veil of protection, and the voice of 
public sentiment is in its favor^ 

All devices by which the secrecy of the ballot is 
destroyed, such as the use of headings, colored 
tickets, or marked ballots, are exceedingly repre¬ 
hensible, and should be discountenanced. 

To prevent the use of such devices, the Govern¬ 
ment should issue all tickets. They should be of 
uniform size, with the names of all the candi¬ 
dates printed thereon; then the voter should be 
required to cancel a name or names, until those 
he desired alone remained. The ticket thus pre¬ 
pared would be free from all ear-marks or dis¬ 
tinguishing headings. 

In England, under the Ballot Act, the Govern¬ 
ment furnishes all the tickets, which are of uniform 
size, with the names of the candidates printed 
thereon in alphabetical order. The ticket is 
stamped by the officer, and numbered ; the voter 
marks his choice on the ticket and folds it up, 


leaving the official seal alone exposed to the offi¬ 
cer’s view, and deposits it in a box that is securely 
locked. The officer is bound to account, at the 
close of the election, for all the tickets furnished 
to him. If the voter spoils a ticket, the officer 
gives him a new one, and carefully preserves the 
one that has been spoiled. 

The imitation of ballots, so arranged as to de¬ 
ceive the ignorant and unwary voter, is made a 
penal offence in this State, and deservedly so, as 
all will concede. 

In our State the secrecy of the ballot has been 
so far invaded by constitutional provision as to 
require the numbering of the tickets—a wise pro¬ 
vision to prevent fraud. 

There are two occasions when the voter is called 
upon to expose his vote— 

I St. If the vote is an illegal one—in which case 
its illegality must first be established, and then the 
voter can be compelled to answer how he voted. 
Under our system of numbering the ballots, in con¬ 
junction with the list of voters kept by the election 
officers, the vote itself can be readily traced, and 
excluded. 

2d. In every case of alleged fraud, when it is 
sought to be established how many legal votes the 
candidate received, the voter can be called and 
asked how he voted. But the voter cannot be 
compelled to answer, except in a judicial investi¬ 
gation. 

A great safeguard to the purity of the ballot- 
box, lies in the fact, that it has been judicially 
determined that in the prosecution of an election 


13 


officer for violating his trust, the box may be 
brought into court, and the tickets there recounted, 
in the presence of the jury, in order to establish 
the fraud. 

It has been held, however, that in such an inves¬ 
tigation the voter cannot be compelled to disclose 
for whom he voted, if he chooses to avail himself 
of his constitutional privileges. This ought not 
to be the law. It is magnifying the incident 
beyond the franchise. It is an instance of pecu¬ 
liar peril to our institutions, where the mere 
incident of suffrage is to be preserved at the 
expense of the right itself 

Of what value is the elective franchise, if corrupt 
officers of the election, by a stroke of the pen, can 
disfranchise a score of citizens ? 

The pollution of the ballot-box is an evil which, 
if tolerated, will sap the very foundations of gov¬ 
ernment by the people ; in its results, it may bring 
strife, bloodshed and anarchy. We suspend the 
writ of habeas corpus in times of public peril, for 
the safety of the Nation. Why not, also, the 
secrecy of the ballot, to secure its purity? 

If the moral sentiment of the community is 
strong, and the citizen appreciates the magnitude 
of the evil, by his own volition he can remedy it. 

How ignoble the citizen, how unworthy of the 
name is he, when, for selfish reasons, he will refuse 
to disclose his vote though it may be necessary, in 
order to punish a wicked offender, and keep the bal¬ 
lot-box free from the reproach of corruption. Such 
a man is unworthy to exercise the high preroga¬ 
tive of citizenship, and is disloyal to his country. 


14 


A fraud may have been perpetrated, which the 
opening of the box and counting the tickets will 
not disclose, and the only means of detection lies 
in the examination of all the voters of the district. 
In such a case, every personal consideration should 
be voluntarily sacrificed for the public weal, or 
else the law should compel the reluctant and 
unworthy voter to speak. 

In representative bodies, the ballot ought to be 
prohibited, for those acting in such a capacity 
ought to perform their trust in the most open, 
conspicuous and public manner. 

In Great Britain, in the time of Charles II, 
political writers advocated its use in Parliament. 
There may have been some reason then for this, in 
view of the tremendous power of Court influence ; 
but to-day, with the representative system well de¬ 
fined, and the power of the Crown restricted, and 
the popular branch controlling the government, its 
use could only be pernicious. In Scotland, in 1662, 
the ballot was used in effecting the ostracism of 
certain political leaders. The Act was called the 
“Billeting Act,” and the plan followed was this : 
Each member of Parliament wrote, in a disguised 
hand, on a piece of paper, the names of twelve 
suspected persons ; the billets were then put in a 
bag held by the Registrar; the bag was then 
sealed, and afterwards opened in the Exchequer 
Chamber, where the billets were immediately 
burned, and the names of the ostracised concealed, 
on oath. In 1705, it was again proposed, as a 
measure, to guard the members from court influ¬ 
ence, but not adopted. 


15 


In our own national, State and Municipal Legis¬ 
latures, the ballot should have no place whatever; 
every member of these bodies is acting in a rep¬ 
resentative capacity, and is responsible to his con¬ 
stituency for a just and proper discharge of duty. 
If secret balloting were allowed, personal respon¬ 
sibility would cease, and the most disastrous results 
follow. A cardinal principle in the political educa¬ 
tion of every American citizen should be, eternal 
opposition to the use of the ballot in every repre¬ 
sentative body. Even as at present arranged, 
with the roll-call in use, and with open voting, and 
the record of '‘ayes” and " noes ” published far 
and wide, some men, with unblushing wickedness, 
have misrepresented their constituencies, defied 
their wishes, and that, too, regardless of the record 
of infamy and dishonor their votes created on the 
roll of their assembly and in the public press. If 
this be true, in the face of exposure and criticism, 
what would they not do if their acts were shielded 
and covered by the secrecy of the ballot ? 

We would also condemn the use of the ballot 
in our electoral college. There is certainly no 
use for the ballot in the hands of our Presidential 
electors ; why should they vote by ballot ? Are 
they not elected directly to vote for certain candi¬ 
dates ? Why, then, should they not vote openly, 
and before the community, so that their fidelity 
may be seen. What good reason can there be, 
in case the election of a President is thrown into 
the national House of Representatives, for that 
body to elect by ballot ? As representatives, voting 
for others, ought not their votes to be cast openly 


i6 


before the world, so that their constituencies may 
know their action, and be able to approve or dis¬ 
approve it?* No one acting as the trusted agent 
of others should vote secretly. 

The term ballot-box, however, is often used 
with a broad sweep of meaning, making it, as 
a term, synonymous with “ suffrage ” or the “ elect¬ 
ive franchise.” It represents, in our institutions, 
the supreme liberty and privilege of citizenship. 
Its value ought not to be under-estimated, and it 
cannot, with relation to its importance, be over¬ 
estimated. It is the corner stone upon which the 
superstructure of our civil institutions rests. Every 
attempt to weaken it or undermine its strength is 
fraught with peril to our liberties. 

In a country as broad as ours, with its many 
millions of people, the maintenance of absolute 
confidence in its purity, is of the gravest im¬ 
portance. 

Let us, for a moment, look at the structure of 
our Republican form of Government, and note 
three important elements in our civil polity, and, 
as American citizens, let us learn to value our great 
privileges, and recognize our personal responsi¬ 
bility as freemen. 

To do this properly, let us enter the chariot of 
thought, and then, with the rapidity of light, we 
may traverse the rich fields of history, containing 
the record of man’s achievements in the ages past. 
Among the ruins of Ancient Greece or Rome, or, 
amid the disjointed and scattered fragments of the 
works of those who flourished in Mediaeval Europe, 
we may gather suggestions, and endeavor, in some 


17 


small degree, to trace the evolutions by which 
pure government has been developed among 
mankind, until, in the meridian glory of our Nine¬ 
teenth Century, we behold its grandest type in 
our beloved republic. 

By the term government, as used in political or 
philosophical discussion, we mean that organism, 
no matter what may be its form, which represents 
the sovereign power in society and among men. 
It is that power which protects the social organiza¬ 
tion—that power which makes and executes law, 
and which demands and receives, while executing 
and enforcing the law, the loyalty and obedience of 
the people. 

It is the embodiment of the majesty and power, 
as well as the sovereign will, of the community. 
There is no certain knowledge to be found on the 
fields of history, concerning the origin of govern¬ 
ment. We traverse her fruitful plains, until we 
reach the uttermost bounds of history, and see 
beyond, the marshy lowlands and bleak and unin¬ 
viting rocky highlands, the place where wild tradi¬ 
tion holds undisputed sway, and where the ruins 
of ancient societies are mingled in inextricable con¬ 
fusion, and covered by the debris of mythological 
monstrosities and fanciful fables. 

We hear, from across the border, suggestions 
of families, with fathers acting as priest and king 
in their own households; and philosophy, like the 
naturalist with a single bone of some obsolete 
creation, attempts to reconstruct the body, until 
lo ! we are presented with the most ancient, or 
the patriarchal form of government. 


i8 

On the margin of the historical ground, in what 
we may call the debatable lands, we can trace the 
absolute despotisms of Ancient Egypt; behold the 
ruins of Babylon and Nineveh, see footprints of 
the Chaldees ; admire the pomp and splendor of 
the Medo-Persian and Assyrian dynasties. These 
ruins are all marked with blood. They speak of 
conquest and slavery; of the royal few, and the 
serving, suffering multitudes. We cannot pause 
here for help ; all of this ground is shrouded in 
darkness, misery and crime. There is no sugges¬ 
tion coming from the long line of the Pharaohs, or 
the Pyramids of Egypt; no whisper of liberty from 
the tomb' of Nebuchadnezzar or Cyrus. Human 
life was without value, and war, cruel, relentless 
war, was the chief end of man’s existence. Philip 
of Macedon learned and loved the art of war ; 
Alexander fought for fame and wept for other 
fields in which his prowess might be displayed, 
for other nations to pay him tribute, for other 
peoples to subject to his despotic sway; but the 
glory of his military achievements was soon 
quenched in debauchery and lust. 

Let us halt the chariot for a moment. This is 
the field of Syria ; once it was Palestine ; and once 
it was heathen Canaan. What a curious history we 
find in this sacred spot, thickly strewn with frag¬ 
ments, with moss-grown remnants of the past, 
marked by the tramp of centuries. Here we learn 
that a ray of brilliant light flashed forth its glory, 
all through the darkness, only, however, to be 
eclipsed at last in anarchy and desolation. This 
ray of light was an emanation from the throne 


19 


of God. The greatest lawgiver and ruler of the 
ages guided those who bore that light, as they 
journeyed to this promised land. Laws, writ¬ 
ten by the finger of God were embodied in 
the government of this people. The theocracy 
of Judah, created by the King of Kings, and sus¬ 
tained by deep religious convictions and super¬ 
stitions, passed away. The spirit of the surround¬ 
ing nations made the people cry out for a king; 
their cry was heard and answered, and the sceptre 
of kingly power was handed to Saul. The land¬ 
marks tell us, that after two or three glorious 
reigns, the despotism of the surrounding nations 
swayed the sceptres of Judah and Israel. Only 
intermittent flashes of the old glory are henceforth 
seen, until the dismembered fragments are scat¬ 
tered abroad over the face of the globe, or swal¬ 
lowed up and lost in the great sea of humanity. 

Moses died, but the principles of justice which 
he enunciated still live. The principles of the 
Jewish religion and laws fostered liberty and made 
human life sacred. The temple on Mount Moriah 
has been transformed into the Mosque of Omar; 
but the principles of Judaism, broadened and 
deepened to answer the wants of humanity, have 
survived the transformation, and have been trans¬ 
muted into the gospel of Love, through the prom¬ 
ised Messiah, which, gifted with imperishable 
longevity, is leavening the whole lump of human 
existence with the magic spell of “ Love thy 
neighbor as thyself.” Christianity is the fountain 
of civil and religious liberty ; and the flow of its 
waters shall murmur and sing the angel song 


20 


through all the passing years, “ Peace on earth, 
good will to men.” 

Now we are sweeping through Asia Minor; 
soon we cross the .^gean sea, and rest on the 
classic ground of history, the land of learning, 
philosophy, culture and art. 

Here are traces of the first government that 
was founded on the idea that the people were the 
State. 

The Greek republic, more especially the Athe¬ 
nian, gives us the democratic government in its 
fullest and most logical form. The people, that is, 
the free men, legislated directly ; no despotic king 
gave to the people the arbitrary dictation of his 
will as the law of the State. The supreme power 
was vested in the people. The record informs us 
that all public questions were submitted to the 
people, who met almost weekly. 

The Athenian youth, at 20 years of age, was a 
sovereign. He was the equal of kings, for he 
made the law ; his brain might originate it; his 
eloquence might convince the judgment of others, 
and his vote could aid in its adoption. 

Here we find a most valuable suggestion, one 
which we must carry with us, for its counterpart is 
to be found in our own polity ; it is this, that the 
majority shall govern. 

With regret, however, we note the stain of 
slavery, and find this little republic filled with 
slaves. They wrought, while the Athenian free¬ 
men voted, and legislated, and talked philosophy. 

Aristotle, whose nartie is a synonym for wisdom, 
has truly said that a State should not be too large 


21 


nor too small; it should not be so large but that 
all the citizens can be acquainted with each other, 
for “ how else can they elect their magistrates.” 

In the Greek republics, the people voted and 
legislated directly; they knew nothing of the rep¬ 
resentative in government. Nowhere else in all 
human history will we find such simplicity in the 
machinery of government, unless, indeed, among 
the Cantons of brave Switzerland. 

But now we will pass into Europe proper. Let 
us alight among the dense forests of Germany; 
behold the record of a hardy, valiant, honest 
people. These were the Teutons, who conquered 
Roman legions. These were also the men who 
found the germ of representative government. 
They originated the thought of “ no taxation with¬ 
out representation.” Montesquieu sings their 
praises and notes their virtues. Originally, their 
government was a staid gathering of friends, lim¬ 
ited in number, and satisfying the postulate of 
Aristotle. In the folkmote they all knew each 
other. 

Where we have halted, we soon discover a 
magnificent ruin ; its size and strength bespeak 
its perpetuity. It shall always remain a noted 
landmark in the domain of history. On it we read 
the story of Charlemagne, the Frankish chieftain, 
who built a mighty empire, and governed it with 
skill and prudence. Here we can trace a system, 
a plan of government, that furnished the root 
germ which enters so largely into the machinery 
of government in the foremost nations of Europe. 
Here we find another suggestion, one that we can 


22 


carry with us, for it, too, exists in our own beloved 
land. The empire itself was mortal, and has per¬ 
ished from the earth ; but the system of Charle¬ 
magne, in its development, is immortal. 

History tells us that “at stated periods he sent 
messengers into counties, to confer with Counts 
and people; enforce render of service; hold courts 
and hear grievances, and redress them, or report 
them to the king. The coming of these envoys 
was an occasion of extraordinary importance ; it 
furnished an opportunity to discuss the affairs of 
the people, and to have and dispose of appeals 
from the hundred courts, and present addresses 
to the King on subjects of universal importance 
and interest. These envoys were met by the 
most influential and considerable people of the 
counties.” 

We find, in Hungary, and in our mother coun¬ 
try, that the shires of these countries were 
modeled on the plan of the Frankish chieftain, and 
that his authority on matters of government was 
highly respected. 

Let us pass, for a moment, over into the water- 
bound, richly strewn fields of Albion. 

The record of her past unfolds to us the story 
of her kings, of her life, and of her development. 
Early, in the very morning of her history, we see 
her kings in conference with the most eminent and 
powerful of their subjects ; and we read, in their 
official utterances, of the sanction of these advisers 
of the kings. Kingly utterances were thus 
weighted with authority. As the years sped on, 
these advisers must have largely increased their 


23 


numbers, for Rufus, we are told, built Westminster 
Hall for their accommodation. In 1265, during 
the reign of Henry III, the first really representa¬ 
tive body of lords, knights and citizens met, and 
they were called the Parliament. The origin of 
the Parliament is not clearly defined in history, but 
grew out of the necessities of the advancing civili¬ 
zation. A little space back of this, the memorable 
Runnymede and Magna Charta. In 1213 the first 
representative body was held, to consult over the 
affairs of the kingdom. Then came Magna 
Charta, in 1215, and on this ancient scroll we 
read— 

“No scutage shall be imposed in the Kingdom, 
except by the common consent of the Common 
Council of the Kingdom, except to ransom the 
King’s body, knight his eldest son, marry his 
eldest daughter ; and for this there shall be suffi¬ 
cient aid.” 

The Great Charter provided how the coun¬ 
cil should be convened ; the representation pro¬ 
vided for in it was developed in the following 
reign. The Lincoln Assembly, of Henry III, 
(1236) was attended by four knights of the county, 
elected by the milities and good men thereof In 
1264, Henry was taken prisoner, and it was not 
until 1265 that representatives of boroughs, as 
well as counties, were recognized. In electing 
these representatives, all freemen were allowed to 
vote. Thus the germ from the system of Charle¬ 
magne, the conferences of the kings with their 
leading men, and the advance of thought, de¬ 
veloped the representative idea among men, which 


24 


has culminated in England, in the well equipped 
and powerful limited monarchy of to-day. 

This idea developed on the continent, as far 
back as the Eleventh, Twelfth and Thirteenth 
Centuries. It obtains in Arragon, Castile and 
Erance, and is now acknowledged in every im¬ 
portant government of the earth. It also is 
embodied in our State and National system. 

Let us turn back, for an instant only, to 
Old Holland. See that band of stern-featured 
men ; they are those who developed the grand 
idea of equality. Those men are the Pilgrim 
Eathers. This principle is also built into our 
systems. 

Thus, in the fields of history we have gleaned 
suggestions of the origin of three grand constitu¬ 
ent elements of a free government by the people: 
The will of the majority supreme, the develop¬ 
ment of the representative idea, in government, 
and lastly, the great doctrine of equality. 

It only remains for us to furnish, from our own 
history, the crowning act of development—Un¬ 
restricted Suffrage. Even the manacled slave is 
free, and his vote is equal to yours or mine. Now, 
let me ask, what is our individual responsibility ? 

Eormerly, nations depended principally on the 
accident of the character of the King or Minister, 
for their national character. A succession of war¬ 
like kings made Denmark a military power; a 
succession of quiet, half-witted sovereigns reduced 
her to political nullity. 

Under Richelieu, Erance was intriguing and 
ambitious. Under Eleury, she was careless and 


25 


pacific; but now, with the extension of suffrage 
and the active use of the principles of representa¬ 
tion, the people interfere in public affairs, often 
direct them, and almost always influence them. 
The conduct of a nation must always be affected 
by the disposition of the million. Louis XIV said : 
“I am the State;” but free and constitutional 
government everywhere, to-day, proclaims the 
third estate, which is the Nation. The vox populi 
is the voice of the government. The government 
can never, as a rule, be purer than the people; it 
will feel the pulse of public morality. The gov¬ 
ernment of a representative character will always 
become a reflection of the popular character, or 
degenerate, through public apathy. We are re¬ 
sponsible for our Government; because we can 
make or unmake our national morality and politi¬ 
cal character. 

In the great American republic, which is our 
birthright, we behold the union of these grand 
principles of free government. We see embodied 
in our autonomy the trinity of excellencies : the 
political equality of our people, from the Pilgrim 
Fathers; the ruling will of the majority, from the 
republics of Greece, and the evolution of repre¬ 
sentative action, from the thought of Charlemagne 
and the forests of Germany. This triumvirate 
shows forth the supreme excellence of human 
thought, aided and developed by religious senti¬ 
ment ; it is our heritage, as freemen, and we find 
it symbolized in the ballot-box. 

Young men of America, you are the hope of the 
Nation. Realize, if you can, the tremendous re- 


26 


sponsibility of citizenship ; for every citizen, by his 
loyalty and action, or by his disloyalty and neglect, 
is shaping the political character of the Nation ; 
and each one, in his moral and social life, is 
shaping the morality of the Nation. Remember 
that the Government will surely reflect the political 
life, and thought, and moral character of the 
majority of the people. 

The elective franchise is a sacred privilege in 
your hands. Let it never be exercised in the 
spirit of indifference, or permit it to be despised 
through your example. 

Party organization is a necessity, and party 
fealty is a grand consideration ; but blind party 
zeal is a curse to a nation. He who elevates 
party loyalty above love of country should be 
anathematized in history with Benedict Arnold, as 
a traitor. 

Preserve the purity of the ballot, and inculcate, 
by act and speech, the great truth that party 
success achieved through corruption and impurity, 
is dearly bought. One of the trinity of political 
excellencies is lost. The will of the majority is 
not then supreme. No party can afford to win its 
way to office over a pathway of fraud. 

Young men of America, what shall be the future 
of our Republic ? The answer rests with you. 
Her destiny is in your keeping; will you make it 
bright and glorious, lifting, by your united strength, 
her banner high above the loftiest peaks of 
National growth and prosperity, placing her gov¬ 
ernment on a plane of purity? Then I charge 
you, to-night, hold fast and prize our liberties. 


27 


Stand . forth always sustaining truth and right. 
Hold fast the three grand doctrines of our civiTj 
polity; and with all these, guard the ballot box, as' 
you would your limb or life, or sacred honor. 
Guard it as the children of Israel guarded the 
Ark of the Lgrd, for it is, indeed, the “ Holy of 
Holies” in our political institutions. 


CONGRESS 



0 029 041 851 3 




